I do want to tear down the whole structure of power and heirarchy. What do you think about that?

Making one ineligible for consideration is where the discrimination occurs, FS. If I had formed the National Association for the Advancment of White People (NAAWP), and gave out scholarships to whites only, people would be up in arms. It's the same concept.

Oh my my... you do!? How lovely! ^^

First, are you prepared to accept that (if you are white) you have been systemically advantaged by virtue of your lucky birth?

Second, are you prepared to scrap or reform all legislation that targets disadvantaged groups? (ie. War on Drugs; crack/coke penalties)

Thirdly, will you join me in denouncing the elite structure of power in America as systemaitaclly patriarchal, violent, and racist in its implementation of power retaining measures? (ie. wars, culture battles, lobby groups etc)

Draugnar, the vast majority of affirmative action does not make ANYONE ineligible. Does it make it harder for individual white people to succeed? Yes. But the status quo is that it is easier for white people to succeed.

It sucks to be affected by it personally. But its all a matter of perscpetive.

I suspect however, that neither of you agree that white-male privelige exists though, eh?

First, you're retarded to think that being born white in this day and age is an advantage.

Second, that ridiculous couple of examples of legislation doesn't target "disadvantaged" groups.. They target a segment of the population I'd rather have shot than fined.

Thirdly, you're dumb. I wouldn't join you for a stroll in the park, you racist prick.

I don't believe we have to tear down the system to reform it. I believe we have to make laws be applied equally across the board. 40+ years is enough time to make education and advancement opportunities available to everyone regardless of race or sex. And nowadays, the problem isn't in what race you are, but what the financial state of your neighborhood is. There are many affluent minorities in business and medicine and law and the like, and many poor whites who will never escape the life of living in the inner city and working at McDs or the rural community on mom and pop's farm.

We need to create equal availability regardless of income to education and opportunity. That is where the real discrimination lies today. Basic education needs to be more equal and not be advantageous to the affluent neighborhoods and advanced education needs to be supplemented such that those of less means get the grants to compensate, provided they show the talent to advance with what they were given at birth.

That is where we need to focus, but it isn't going to happen as long as we view social/financial inequity as a racial problem...

Friendly Sword, you just became my favourite person on this website. I'm so glad that I'm not alone in taking this side of the debate.

"Second, are you prepared to scrap or reform all legislation that targets disadvantaged groups? (ie. War on Drugs; crack/coke penalties)"
That's not targeting a group. It is up to each individual to get into or not get into drugs. If they do the penalty should be the same, irrespective of their background.

@figle +1 - The penalty *is* the same, regardless of race. The fact that more AAs are sent up has nothing to do with inequality at any level of the law. It has to do with the fact that more AAs are committing the crimes to begin with.

And why pray tell to more African Americans commit crimes to begin with, if structural and institutionalized racism is not a problem?

However you do have a point when you say that it's not strictly racial. You're right. It's not, it does have a lot to do with your parent's affluence as well. There are poor white people. But you can't take race out of the equation. Whether we admit it or not race is still an extremely important locus of discrimination in our society. And don't give me this "Whites are being discriminated against" bullshit either. It has always been, and still is, much much easier to be white, even a poor white, than any other race.

It's amazing to me that people have the blinders necessary to doubt that whiteness remains a gigantic advantage.

I aint never got a hand out for being white. I see many people from other races getting handouts, however... Odd...

And yet white people are still the single wealthiest racial group in the world. Odd...

Maybe that has something to do with the fact that "handouts" as you so disparagingly term them, don't do very much to alleviate deeper, more fundamental forms of discrimination.

Black People are statistically more likely to do Crack.
White people are statistically more likely to do Coke.
Penalties for doing Crack are dramatically higher than Coke, despite the fact this it is essentially the same shit. This ain't racist, yo?

Anyway, with regards to people who think I am a 'racist prick' for believing that it is in advantage to be a white male in America; are you blind? Of course it's a f-ing racial issue!

The confusion here, that Draugnar picks up on, is that disadvantagement is not at it's essence something racial. It's about segments of the population exercising dominance over other segments. Race just happens to be one of the prime conduits for opression.

Affirmative Action is a clumsy tool, and often it's effectiveness is limited. But it is better than nothing, considering the alternative.

And why is that racist, anyway? I don't believe that white people are genetically created to opress blacks, and I believe that the vast majority of people in America are not conciously racist (this may be too generous). But the system is broke people, and it ain't going to fix itself.

@Mafia: Maybe so. I'm not saying that things are equal, I know there are issues. The things that annoy me are cases of positive discrimination, in almost any occurrence.
Another for me is when people who get extra time in exams. There are some cases that are fair enough, but for example I had a friend who was diagnosed as being dyslexic. As a result of this he got an extra 20% (figure uncertain) longer to do the paper.
Now, I have a scientifically focused mind, and my writing skills leave a lot to be desired (as anyone who's ever played against me will know). However, the difference here: he'd done a test that told people he couldn't write well; I couldn't write well.
We were both good scientists, such that the limiting factor on our papers was not knowing the material, but having the time and linguistic control to articulate this. Therefore I feel it is unreasonable that he should be allowed extra time.

Looking at this another way: what is the point of an exam? Suppose he got a good mark in this exam, and so was hired to work on something - perhaps organising the construction of a structure. He's not going to be allowed an extension from his bosses just because he's not able to write well.
Or maybe that's exactly why British engineering projects so often overrun

I'm sorry. I'm not convinced. Dyslexia is a serious learning disabillity. You're suggesting that your friend should just be left to deal with that, when it is in fact a recognized medical condition? I'm sorry. I really don't want to be rude, or sound like a troll...but it just seems to me like your entire argument is "Well I don't want anyone else to have something that I don't!" Like a kindergartener who only wants to play with the truck because Billy has it.

What I'm trying to say is who cares which group is the wealthiest? Only racists.

I see individuals, where you see race. You're right, the handouts only encourage stagnation in these targeted groups.. That's why our government does it! Enslavement through means other than the whip. So long as these groups are dependent on the government, the government can do whatever they want and count on these people to vote them back into office.

Figlesquidge, education and testing is all arbitrary and horribly flawed. Additionally, though clearly some people need learning aids, etc. it is extremely difficult to negotiate who gets what. Even so, I don't think you'd say that all children should be given the same tools and time?

Furthermore, being disabled it isn't a very good analogy for adressing racial opression, but even if it was, I don't think it is convincing.

I see individuals, and I see them facing particular difficulties or benefits because they belong to a group that they didn't choose to belong in.

That is f---d up, and I want that to stop.

I feel like you don't know what it means to be racist. I may very well be one, but not because I have noticed that those with power in American society are usually white men.

WHAT!? Mafialigator! That was ridiculous! You're going to get after fig for wanting for someone to work at the same level as he had to... But you're not going to get after people of one race saying "That's not fair" when white people have something they dont!? You've just destroyed whatever standing you had in logic.

I absolutely did not. The situations are too different to compare, and even if they were not. Figlesquidge is complaining that a dyslexic student was given extra time, and comparing that to affirmative action for racial minorities. I'm defending, simultaneously, extra time for students with learning disabilities and affirmative action for racial minorities. My stance is logically sound.
What I'm saying figlesquidge doesn't want is that he doesn't want to see other people given help that he's not getting, even in a situation where help for him would be unwarranted.

You're defending an entire group of people for saying... in your own words... "Well I don't want anyone else to have something that I don't!" and at the same time getting after fig for saying that. If you don't see fault with that, then you need to get a refund on your obviously lousy edumucation.

And we'll let Mafialligator decide when help is warranted. He's the genius here.

No I'm not.
UGH. Here's what you have to understand.
WHITE PEOPLE ALREADY HAVE EVERYTHING!
STUDENTS WITHOUT DISABILITIES ALREADY HAVE EVERYTHING!
And yet they still sit there and say "It's not fair that black people get help." "It's not fair that the dyslexic kid gets extra time."

By comparison, underprivileged people fighting against majority privilege is a totally different situation.

At least, students without disabilities have everything for the sake of this analogy. In reality the situation is more complex, and I do not think it is an apt analogy.

Amon Savag, do you want to have a serious conversation? If you do, I will engage with you, but if you don't, it's kind of pointless and silly. :/

Once again, opression is not a single paradigm. Race is important, but so are gender, class, and tons of differentiating characteristics.

Well firstly I'm still scheptical about Dyslexia, and certainly about it being an 1/0 case. I can't believe that it is as simple as some people have this, some don't.
Yes in some ways that is my arguement. However, the truck analogy doesn't work. It would be more like us both being told to make a house out of lego, then him being given 20 more bricks. If we weren't being compared then sure, he's my friend, I'd be happy for him to have more. However, if at the end of this we are going to be given scores (where my score is not independant of his) then I think it is right for me to feel hard done by.


Also, you don't sound like a troll: I can't remember where this thread started, but that is completely on subject. I accept this is one of my more extreme views, and it's likely to stir up debate.
The friend in question is actually a member on this site, and I'll see if I can get him to comment at some point.